Retrospective Cancellation of Promotion Just Before Superannuation Without Prior Notice Violates Principles of Natural Justice

The applicant was appointed as a Scientific Officer-B at the National Informatics Centre (NIC) in 1988

He received various promotions, eventually being appointed as Scientist-E w.e.f. 29.10.2012 under the Personnel Policy dated 19.09.2016

Just four days prior to his superannuation on 31.05.2022, the respondents issued an order dated 27.05.2022 cancelling his promotion to Scientist-E with retrospective effect from 2012

The respondents contended the promotion was an administrative error because the applicant had allegedly exhausted the maximum of three assessment attempts allowed under Clause 5(xiii) of the 2016 Policy

1. Whether the retrospective cancellation of the applicant's promotion to Scientist-E, on the verge of his retirement, was legally sustainable under the Personnel Policy of 2016 and the principles of natural justice.

2. Whether an employee who serves in a promotional post until retirement is entitled to retiral benefits based on that post, notwithstanding a subsequent reversion order.

The Tribunal applied the Personnel Policy for Group ‘A’ ST Officers dated 19.09.2016, specifically Clause 9, which prohibits the reopening of past review cases conducted since 2011

It further relied on the Principles of Natural Justice, which require a show-cause notice before passing orders with civil consequences

Crucially, the Tribunal followed the precedent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surya Prakash Shrivastava v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2025), which established that an employee who discharges duties on a promoted post until superannuation must receive retiral benefits based on the last pay drawn on that post

The Tribunal found that the applicant fell under the protected category of Para 2 of the 2016 Policy, which was intended to accommodate officers recruited under earlier regimes

The Tribunal reasoned that since the applicant's promotion in 2017 was a "past review case," the respondents were expressly barred by Clause 9 of their own policy from reopening it

Furthermore, the respondents failed to issue a show-cause notice, violating natural justice despite the order having severe civil consequences like pay reduction and loss of status

The Tribunal noted that the applicant had served as Scientist-E for nearly ten years, and a retrospective cancellation issued mere days before retirement was arbitrary

The respondents were directed to fix the applicant’s retiral benefits based on the last pay drawn in the Scientist-E grade and release all arrears within three months